Nikol Pashinyan has outlined the contours of his new political game: a referendum on adopting a new Constitution is scheduled for 2027, or possibly even earlier, perhaps simultaneously with the 2026 parliamentary elections.
Despite this interim success for the authorities, the decisive verdict will come only with the June 2026 parliamentary elections. The central question remains whether the opposition can overcome its fragmentation and articulate an alternative strategy. Markedonov deliberately leaves aside foreign-policy factors, focusing instead on domestic dynamics.
“Local self-governance shall be guaranteed in the Republic of Armenia as one of the essential fundamentals of democracy,” states Article 9 of the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia. These words are meant to represent an unshakable principle - a safeguard of the citizens’ right to manage their own lives. But what happens when these guarantees turn into empty declarations? When, instead of democracy, we see only its fading outlines, and instead of protecting rights, we witness the routine suppression of the opposition?
2022–2025, Nikol Pashinyan repeatedly displayed disrespect toward the martyrs of the Armenian people. Therefore, according to his own 2014 statement, Nikol Pashinyan should himself be declared a persona non grata in the territory of Armenia.
The Public Tribunal draws the attention of Armenian voters to its view that a vote for the Civil Contract Party in the 2026 parliamentary elections would not constitute support for a sovereign Armenia — despite the prime minister’s frequent claims. According to this perspective, such a vote would effectively favor Azerbaijan. Is the Armenian public prepared to pay such a price for “pragmatism,” or does this path risk eroding sovereignty under the guise of a peaceful settlement and amount to yet another victory for Baku over Yerevan? Armenian voters will have to make their choice in the summer of 2026.
Journalist Boris Murazi harshly criticized Serzh Sargsyan’s interview on the Imnemnimi podcast, calling it a collection of unreliable claims and cynicism that crossed every possible red line.
The Public Tribunal insists: the people of Armenia have the right to clear, unequivocal answers, and history deserves to be anchored in unbiased facts. Only then can Armenia overcome the profound crisis created by the political games of Nikol Pashinyan and Serzh Sargsyan. Without an honest reckoning with the past, there is no path out of the catastrophic present.
In an interview with the TV channel 168.am, lawyer and politician, former Minister of Labor and Social Affairs of Armenia Gevorg Petrosyan accused Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan of committing crimes, including high treason under Article 418 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Armenia (RA CC), and overthrowing the constitutional order under Article 420 of the RA CC. According to the RA Criminal Code, these crimes are punishable by 10 to 20 years of imprisonment.
To me it is an absolute fact that Armenia and Artsakh could have fought far more effectively, and that the war could have had a different outcome, if Nikol Pashinyan had not been prime minister, if Arayik Harutyunyan had not been president, if Jalal Harutyunyan had not been commander of the Defense Army, and if Onik Gasparyan had possessed the will and decisiveness among other qualities required of a commander. War is, above all, an art of management.
During the war, army units were literally dismantled: one battalion was sent south, another to the north; the air-defense subunit of the brigade was deployed in the central direction, while the anti-tank battery was sent elsewhere, and so on.
